katha pollitt - kids, here's what not to do

katha pollitt, a morality play in it's final act - kids, here's what not to do.

(i swiped that line from c.i. with permission. it's a c.i. classic and up at the common ills in 2005.)

poor katha. she lost her man. and it was a big deal to her.

now most of us are smart enough to know when a man leaves, he's gone and we get on with our lives. but katha?

so sick and so mental, she stalks him.

and says nasty things about the new woman in his life (a very talented and very smart woman who doesn't deserve katha's carping - she needs to re-direct the anger).

so she chops off her hair which only emphasizes her hooked nose and how chubby she is.

all along she's emphasized how stupid she is.

but she's passed herself off as a feminist.

which does feminism a disservice.

were it not for the myth that feminists were loud and ugly (both false lies), i doubt katha pollitt could have ever passed for a feminist.

elaine and c.i. will tell you that i have long said, 'feminism is not an elastic term.' i understand the 'the more people' not just women 'that use it, the better.' but i also understand that a lot of non-feminists have polluted and watered down the term.

chief among them katha pollitt who's led a small segment (she's not widely read - thankfully) astray. they see her as the den mother because she's about feminism in the way that sex in the city was. translation, not at all.

she put down the ho-hos, the twinkees and the ding-dongs long enough to tell the world that she's supporting bambi and not hillary. she insanely writes, 'both would probably be equally good on women's rights, abortion rights and judicial appointments.'

see that's why we need to be careful who we label feminists. obama has no record of support for reproductive rights or women's rights. the man made his wife take him along to her job interview. he has no record on abortion because he voted 'present' instead of in favor or opposed. that was a strategy by the dreaded n.a.r.a.l. which has been destroying reproductive rights for years. katha once felt similarly and even posted on the n.a.r.a.l. blog but they pulled her comment. n.a.r.a.l. endorsed the 'present' vote - but only for legislators from conservative districts in illionis. bamb wasn't in a conservative district.

n.o.w. did not endorse the strategy. it was a stupid strategy.

but that didn't stop a bambi supporter from LYING and saying 'i was the president of the chicago chapter of n.o.w. and this was our strategy.' well, 1st lie face, you weren't the president then. you had already left office and, what i hear, n.o.w. as well. the woman over n.o.w. in illinois at the time of the 'present' votes made very clear recently that n.o.w. did not support or endorse the 'present' vote.

i guess reading's hard for katha pollitt. she might have to give up stalking & snacking.

so he has no record women can feel comfortable with and, worse, his campaign has lied about the record he does have.

but there's 'feminist' katha from her 'feminist' perch saying 'they're the same on women's issues.'

see that's why we don't let liars use the term feminist.

katha's not a feminist. she's also trashing ms. magazine (in her column for the mag - she endorses bambi in a blog post) for refusing an ad. katha's not a feminist.

she's a loud mouth. she's an ugly and overweight woman.

she is red betty. betty friedan is her alter ego.

both were ugly women - on the inside where it counts (to steal from ava and c.i.).

in her endorsement for obama she talks about new york feminists supporting obama. huh? hillary carried new york, katha. she goes on to list some women (2 are losers, i don't know all but i don't follow the 'academics' who really aren't feminists - yeah, ellen bravo, i mean you). among the 1s she notes is pathetic kate michelman. she cried like a baby in the halls of congress when either alito or roberts was confirmed by the senate. i have that as a screen saver. c.i. snapped that with the cell phone and sent it to me. we've laughed about that forever.

women get stabbed in the back and there's kate, so shocked she's crying.

of course kate raised her fist in the air for public consumption and swore she'd run for congress. then her state's dems made it clear that they didn't want abortion on the ballot and, like a pathetic n.a.r.a.l. 'leader,' she did what she was told.

n.a.r.a.l. is pathetic and they need no more money. we don't support them community wide, we won't support them. the best thing for women's rights would be n.a.r.a.l. closing shop for good. they're pathetic. they make 'deals' that hurt women and they do it to build up 'chits' that never get paid back.

omg! katha's bragging about all the signatures on her stupid peition of 'new york feminists' and i click on it and guess who i see right off the bat?

minnie mouse!

omg.

what an idiot katha is.

minnie mouse's occupation - and remember, she's a 'feminist' - is 'helpmate.'

i see a lot of 'anonymous' - which i really think is the way to go when signing onto a statement you really believe in. that was sarcasm. i see a significant number of men signing on. hopefully, they are feminists. i see a number of women i know personally and not a 1 would qualify as a feminist. in fact, 1 professor has stated repeatedly over the years that she is not a feminist.

so katha's petition is a joke. a sad, pathetic joke. which is how you know it's her petition. it takes a village idiot and, in katha, america has 1.

no doubt she'll soon find something trivial to write about for a few weeks and then return with something more damaging. she always does.

i'm on the phone with kat. she saw hillary's speech a little while ago. i missed it. but kat said, 'you know i do not like hillary ... but that was a great speech.' i'm going to look for it online.

can't find it. i assume it wil be posted at some point on hillary's site so i'll check that tomorrow and you can as well.

let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'

February 5, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the Iraqi refugee crisis gets little attention, Super Duper Tuesday takes place, and more.

Starting with war resistance. Bruce Elder (Sydney Morning Herald via The Canberra Times) reviews Joshua Key's book The Deserter's Tale (written with Lawrence Hill) and notes, "Most nights on SBS's NewsHour With Jim Lehrer there's a silent roll call of American soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. They are, with few exceptions, teenagers or young men in their twenties. Who are these casualties of war? What is their background?" and concludes, "This is the raw, front-line story of America at war and it makes ugly, deeply disturbing but essential reading. Key's final line -- 'I owe one apology and one apology only, and that is to the people of Iraq' -- neatly sums up the tragedy of the war." Joshua Key recognized what he saw on the ground in Iraq: an illegal war. Today, he and his family lives in Canada and are among the ones hoping to be granted safe harbor status. Stuart Netbydrou Oja Jay (The Dominion) reviews the month of January and notes this, "Three hundred supporters of Jeremy Hinzman and Brandon Hughey, the first two war resisters to cross into Canada after refusing to deploy to Iraq with the US military, gathered in Toronto calling upon the Canadian parliament to pass a motion allowing them to remain in Canada. The rally was attended by Liberal foreign affairs critic Bob Rae, as well as Toronto NDP MP Olivia Chow. Similar rallies and actions were held in 11 cities across the country. Days before, a rally of 50 Iraq veterans gathered at the Canadian Embassy in Washington urging the Canadian government to provide sanctuary to all military service personnel looking to escape deployments with the US military. In November the Canadian Supreme Court refused to hear the cases of Hinzman and Hughey, on the grounds that they had previously been turned down by the Canadian Immigration and Refugee Board, which considered the illegality of the Iraq war under international law inadmissible."

You can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


Meanwhile IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." As part of their fundraising efforts for the event, they are holding houseparties and a recent one in Boston featured both IVAW's Liam Madden and the incomprable Howard Zinn as speakers.

Yesterday, Refugee International released a statement declaring, "The number of Iraqi refugees resettled in the United States remained low last month with only 375 Iraqis resettled in January 2008. In response to the latest numbers released today, Refugees International expressed disappointment at the U.S. administration's continual failure to meet its resettlement targets. In September of 2007, the State Department announced its goal of resettling 12,000 Iraqi refugees by the end of the fiscal year. Thus far, the U.S. has only resettled 1,432 Iraqi refugees in FY 2008. In 2007, the U.S. government only resetteled 1,608 Iraqi refugees, despite the fact that the UN Refugee Agency referred 15,477 Iraqis to the U.S." The UNHCR places the number of Iraqis who are refugees at 4.2 million with 2 million displaced externally and 2.2 million displace within Iraq. Last month, the UNHCR's William Spindler noted a study on Iraqi refugees in Syria, "The survey . . . showed that every single person interviewed reported experiencing at least one traumatic event (as defined by the Harvard Trauma Survey) in Iraq, prior to their arrival in Syria. One in five of those registered with UNHCR since January 2007 -- more than 19,000 individuals -- are registered as 'victims of torture and/or violence' in Iraq. . . . Seventy-seven percent of the Iraqi refugees who were interviewed reported being affected by air bombardments and shelling or rocket attacks. Eighty percent reported witnessing a shooting. Sixty-eight percent said they experienced interrogation or harassment by militias or other groups, including receiving death threats, while sixteen percent had been tortured. Seventy-two percent were eye witnesses to a car bombing and seventy-five percent know someone who has been killed." The International Red Cross and Red Crescent states, "In 2008, Iraq is the ICRC's biggest humanitarian operation worldwide, with increased emergency assistance for the civilian population affected by the conflict."

And yet the US State Department's not overly concerned about not meeting their announced goals -- announced when not only were Jordan and Syria embarrassing the US by taking in refugees but so were European countries who were seen as part of some-sort war 'coalition' at one point. Yesterday the State Dept held a press briefing in DC with Homeland Security's Senior Advisor to the Secretary on Iraqi Refugee Issues Lori Scialabba, The State Dept's Deputy Assistant for Consular Affairs Tony Edson, and the Senior Coordinator on Iraqi Refugee Issues Ambassador James Folely. Scialabba vouched for Homeland Security by maintaining, "DHS is committed to working closely with State Department and we have worked closely with State Department to meet the goal of 12,000 admissions. Our role in the process, as Jim described, is to interview and adjudicate the cases, perform certain security checks, not all of them but certain ones, and make sure that the cases get finally approved once all the necessary steps have been completed. We've been doing this on a timely basis in coordination with the other program partners and we'll continue to do so." As Scialabba insisted any hold up or slow-down wasn't the fault of Homeland Security, there was also the issue of numbers which, Scialabba claimed, were 7,700 individuals interviewed by the department out of 17,000 referred. The briefing was a pass-the-buck joke. Bloomberg New's Janine Zacharia attempted to pin down the speakers on general numbers and practices and the best that can said is that the US has set the total number of refugees which is 70,000. The total number of Iraqi refugees the US is stating it will admit is 12,000. The 12,000 is not in addition to the 70,000 (all refugees admitted) but coming out of the 70,000. Scialabba gave this as the qualifications required, "You have to have a well-founded fear of persecution based on one of the five grounds: race, nationality, membership in a particular social group, religion, political opinion. Any number of stories can fit that definition. I mean, if you lost your house because of your political opinion and you can't find anyplace else to live, you don't have anywhere else youc an go, you could be a refugge based on that." Rusch added, quickly, that the refugees are mainly "referred by UNHCR" and "They determine when, in their dealings with individual cases, who are most in need of this particular durable solution, resettlement in a third country." CNN's Elise Labott pressed the State Dept on their previous promise to settle 7,000 last year and Foley stated it didn't happen. Labott pointed out that, yes, it did ("Ellen Sauerbrey stood up -- stood in front of all of us and said the U.S. hopes to resettle 7,000 this year.") while Foley then hid behind "I came on board in September". That's the kind of press briefing it was -- reporters asking for accountability and a lot of refusal to answer questions by the designated spokespeople. But Foley says he can be held to 12,000 for this year.

This is not a new problem. In January of 2007, Ann Scott Tyson (Washington Post) was reporting on a Senate hearing on this issue and the reality is nothing's been accomplished since that hearing and the Senate needs to demand a hearing to determine what's going on in the State Dept. AP notes that the US needs to "accept 10,568 Iraqi refugees in the next eight months if it is to reach 12,00 the number the administration has pledged to resettle in the current budget year, which began in October 2007 and runs until Sept. 30." While Congress is figuring out the State Dept's problem with refugees, they might also try to figure out why the Pentagon needs, according to the White House, $515.4 billion for fiscal year 2009 as Josh White (Washington Post) reported today.


In Iraq today, CNN reports that the Iraqi flag "flew for the first time in Baghdad". It's not the "new" flag so much as it's the latest one, the latest temporary one. As Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) observed last month, "The latest version of the Iraq flag . . . is temporary . . . another band-aid solution. The constitution requires that the parliament pass a new law to pick a flag for Iraq and a national anthem. . . . In technical terms Iraq still has no flag and no anthem. Little has been decided that lasts in Iraq." AFP notes, "In northern Iraq, the autonomous Kurdish minority rarely allows the Iraqi flag to fly over official buildings, perferring its own national banner with its golden sunburst motif. But for many Arabs in the rest of Iraq, the traditional national banner, with its stars, had become a rallying point for an often divided people in the difficult and violent years since the US invasion. . . . So far, the new banner can only be seen over the prime minister's office." They also note that this is the second "new" flag for Iraq since the illegal war started.

Meanwhile the theft of Iraqi oil hits a snag. Roula Khalaf and Dino Mahtani (Financial Times of London) report that the central (puppet) government in Baghdad is telling Big Oil to come on board, don't worry about the lack of oil laws and, "In a sign that the oil law the US has been pressing for is unlikely to be agreed by parliament any time soon, Hussain Shahristani, Iraq's oil minister, said in an interview with the Financial Times that Iraq was now determined to push ahead with plans to raise production from a current 2.5 m barrels per day to 6M bpd in five years." This comes as Reuters reports that Hussain al-Shahristani also declared today that the bpd on Iraqi oil was "the highest since the U.S.-led invasion in 2003". al-Shahristani was in London for the big meet up with Big Oil. Dow Jones reports, "Iraqi oil officials and oil company executives were greeted by demonstrators in London Tuesday protesting long-term oil contracts being signed in Iraq, which they say are handing control of the country's oil wealth to private foreign enterprise." Protestor Greg Muttitt is quoted as stating, "They give control of Iraq's oil to multinationals for 20-30 years. It's like giving my house to a decorator and renting a room back from him." Also speaking in London today was BP PLC's chief exec Tony Hayward who stated that BP is registered and ready to go into Iraq. Yesterday, Robin Pagnamenta (Times of London) reported that a deal was in the works where "ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and Shell would be paid in oil rather than cash to help develop the fields."

Following yesterday's reports that the US military had stated they accidentally killed 9 Iraqi civilians, Reuters writes today of the admission by US command that US forces "killed an innocent woman during a raid in Iraq on Tuesday".

In some of today's reported violence . . .

Bombings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad bombing that left two people wounded while a bombing in Al Anbar Province claimed the lives of 3 'Awakening' Council members and left five more wounded.. Reuters notes a Baghdad bombing near an internet cafe claimed the lives of 1 "member of a neighborhood police unit and a civilian".

Shootings?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports an armed crash in Misan led to three Iraqi military officers being shot dead. Reuters notes that US forces in Tirkit state that they accidentally killed 2 men and one woman while wounding a young girl. Al Bawaba reports that the toll was higher and that the men were father and son and that there were two young girls wounded and one of them has alreday died. Al Bawaba reports a roadside bombing outside Taji in which a bomber killed himself and 8 people who were members of the 'Awakening' council.

Corpse?

Laith Hammoudi (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 4 corpses discovered in Baghdad. Meanwhile, Michael Holden and Paul Tait (Reuters) report that a mass grave with at least 50 corpses was discovered today outside of Baghdad

Turning to US political campaigns. Mike Gravel is running for the Democratic Party nomination for president. Tomorrow he will be on the UC Berkeley campus, at the IGS Library (Moses Hall) speaking from five to six p.m. Today he will also be in Berkley for an open house sponsored by World Can't Wait at Spud's Pizza, 3290 Adeline. Gravel's Deputy Campaign Manager Jonathan Kraus explains at American Chronicle, "He would cut the defense budget by 60%, and give us a stronger, more efficient military. He would institute a carbon tax right at the source (the lump of coal and barrel of oil), which would filter through the system and shift our infrastructure to carbon-free, zero-emissions technology very rapidly. He has said 'we can get off of gasoline in 5 years, and off of carbon in 10.' He has accurately pointed out that in 1940, the United States had no military capacity, and within 3 years, they were producing a Liberty Ship every day. This was over 60 years ago." Gravel is the only Democratic in the race calling for an immediate withdrawal of US troops from Iraq -- and not a withdraw of only "combat" troops: "Senator Gravel's position on Iraq remains clear and consistent to commence an immediate and orderly withdrawal of all U.S. troops that will have them home within 120 days. The sooner U.S. troops are withdrawn, the sooner we can pursue aggressive diplomacy to bring an end to the civil war that currently consumes Iraq. Senator Gravel seeks to work with neighboring countries to lead a collective effort to bring peace to Iraq. One of the leading opponents of the Vietnam War, Senator Gravel was one of the first current or former elected officials to publicly oppose the planned invasion of Iraq in 2002. He appeared on MSNBC prior to the invasion insisting that intelligence showed that there were indeed no weapons of mass destruction, that Iraq posed no threat to the United States and that invading Iraq was against America's national interests and would result in a disaster of epic proportions for both the Unitd States and the Iraqi people. . . . As President, Senator Gravel will call for a U.S. corporate withdrawal from Iraq and hand over reconstruction contracts to Iraqi businesses which will empower Iraqi nationals to reconstruct their own country."

At The Wilder Side, it's noted, "I think most Americans are tired of the war. I know I am passionately against it. We may disagree on who is exactly the best peace candidate, or what is exactly the best strategy. But, whichever candidate or strategy you believe in, please keep peace at the forefront of your thinking tomorrow. Peace is the biggie. It is the issue that the corporate parties want us to forget." Kimberly Wilder is a Green and the Green Party's candidates vary. We'll start with the Illinois Green Party. Kent Mesplay, Cynthia McKinney and Howie Hawkins as a stand in for Ralph Nader. (Jared Ball has dropped out the race.) That's one of five states with a Green primary today. The Green Party notes that the others are Arkansas where McKinney, Mesplay and Kat Swift are running; California where Jesse Johnson, McKinney, Mesplay, Nader and Swift are running and Massachusetts where McKinney, Mesplay, Swift and Nader are still in the race -- Hawkins is a placeholder for Nader on those ballots. Streaming interview with McKinney here. Sarah Terry-Cobo (Contra Costa Times) spoke with a number of voters including James Achee who "said he will most likely vote for Ralph Nader, but was not aware that Cynthia McKinney . . . was on the Green ballot." Laura Norton (The Press Democrat) spoke to some voters in California -- one of whom was Coral Becker who stated, "I wanted to stay green and make a point. I voted for Ralph Nader." Kevin Zeese (writing at Al Jazeera Magazine), notes, of voters attempting to figure out who is the 'peace vote,' "Others, will look to the Green Party which has two strong peace candidates in Ralph Nader and former congresswoman Cynthia McKinney or other third parties like the Libertarians and Constitution Parties which also are running anti-war candidates. Nader has questioned whether Obama has the backbone to stand up to the special interests on the issue of militarism and points out how Bush justified the war based on Clinton policies, McKinney seeks to lead a 'peace slate' to end the war and, like Nader, opposes the bloated military and intelligence budgets."

Meanwhile out lesbian Laura Flanders writes at The Nation (no link to trash), "I wish I felt what Robin Morgan feels. 'Our President Ourselves!' she cheers, in a rousing pitch for Hillary Clinton." Laura, we all just wish you'd have the self-respect to call out the homophobia by the Barack Obama campaign instead of writing that ridiculous "please, Bambi, break with Richard Daley" whimper. It was stupid because Michelle Obama was assistant to who? Richard Daley, that's right. Information is power and lack of it is weakness -- thereby explaining RadioNation with Laura Flanders (again, no links to trash). It was disgusting because when a gay woman won't call out homophobia, what will she call out? Nothing.

Flanders likes to talk about "people power" and used to enjoy rocking out to Patti Smith's "People Have the Power" but Laura herself has none because she refused to call out of homophobia. It was more important to her to 'fit in' and be 'one of the gang' than it was to stand up for justice, to stand up for what was right. If you haven't already, be sure to read Marcia's "Laura Flanders the self-hating, disrespecting lesbian." Apparently having a girl-crush on Michelle Obama, Laura Flanders concludes, "Today, with fingers crossed, I'm voting for Barack and Michelle Obama. At least we can call their community organizers' bluff." What? Flanders has never called Barack or Michelle out on anything. Homophobia was okay with little Laura when it was blasted onstage in South Carolina. Not a peep. Can't speak up when it matters then maybe you shouldn't have a voice.

But this is the woman who wanted to get up in arms that Obama's campaign was using a song by a child molestor (yes, that was over a year ago, she fell in line because she knows who signs her checks and keeps her on air) but had no problem booking Pig-Boy who was twice busted for online predatory activities with younger women. It's a funny kind of 'strength,' a temporary one. She's weak. And that may be the worst we can say about someone who's tried to self-present as strong.

She might try to argue that she's applauded the 'movement' and not the candidate previously. When the 'movement' utilizes homophobia, applauding it and refusing to call it out makes Flanders the Andrew Sullivan of the 'left.' She was once a strong voice. The Nation cut her great radio program down from six hours a week to one. It took Flanders to cut herself down from greatness which she has. And all these people using their 'name' and 'image' this campaign cycle don't seem aware of the damage they've done to themselves. These things will not be forgotten, regardless of today's outcome. They have trashed their own nests and, for chuckles, picture ten years on down the line when it's, "Ms. Flanders, clean up an aisle twelve." Hopefully, someone other than Bambi -- and of course Flanders herself -- will have stood up for the rights of LGBT so she'll have some work place protections left.

Robin Morgan, the one and only Robin Morgan, puts it into perpsective, puts it on the table, in "Goodbye To All That (#2)" (Women's Media Center) and that's because it takes a woman not afraid to be called a woman -- or any of the slurs on women -- to speak the truth. A woman who hides, who says, "I'm gay but if I call out Bambi's homophobia they might cancel my radio show and no one listens to it anymore and I can't get a real job so I have to make nice . . ." can't speak for any woman because she can't even speak for herself. Morgan's never been a Flanders. Morgan explains the double standard in place that exists to knock down a female candidate no matter what.

-- Young political Kennedys -- Kathleen, Kerry, and Bobby Jr. -- all endorsed Hillary. Senator Ted, age 76, endorsed Obama. If the situation were reversed, pundits would snort "See? Ted and establishment types back her, but the forward-looking generation backs him." (Personally, I'm unimpressed with Caroline's longing for the Return of the Fathers. Unlike the rest of the world, Americans have short memories. Me, I still recall Marilyn Monroe's suicide and a dead girl named Mary Jo Kopechne in Chappaquiddick.)
[. . .]
Goodbye to pretending the black community is entirely male and all women are white . . .
Surprise! Women exist in all opinions, pigmentations, ethnicities, abilities, sexual preferences, and ages -- not only African American and European American but Latina and Native American, Asian American and Pacific Islanders, Arab American and -- hey, every group, because a group wouldn't exist if we hadn't given birth to it. A few non-racist countries may exist -- but sexism is everywhere. No matter how many ways a woman breaks free from other discriminiations, she remains a female human being in a world still so patriarchal that it's the "norm."
[. . .]
Goodby to some women letting history pass by while wringing their hands, because Hillary isn't as "likeable" as they've been warned they must be, or because she didn't leave him, couldn't "control" him, kept her family together and raised a smart, sane daughter. (Think of the blame if Chelsea had ever acted in the alcoholic, neurotic manner of the Bush twins!) Godbye to some women pouting because she didn't bake cookies or she did, sniping because she learned the rules and then bent or broke them. Grow the hell up. She is not running for Ms.-perfect-pure-queen-icon of the feminist movement. She's running to be president of the United States.
[. . .]
Goodbye to some young women eager to win male approval by showing they're not feminists (at least not the kind who actually threaten the status quo), who can't indentify with a woman candidate because she is unafraid of eeueweeeu yucky power, who fear their boyfriends might look at them funny if they say something good about her. Goodbye to women of any age again feeling unworthy, sulking "what if she's not electable?" or "maybe it's post-feminism and whooosh we're already free." Let a statement by the magnificent Harriet Tubman stand as reply. When asked how she managed to save hundreds of enslaved African Americans via the Underground Railroad during the Civil War, she replied bitterly, "I could have saved thousands -- if only I'd been able to convince them they were slaves."
I'd rather say a joyful Hello to all the glorious young women who do identify with Hillary and all the brave, smart men -- of all ethnicities and age -- who get that it's in their self-interest, too. She's better qualified. (D'uh.) She's a high-profile candidate with an enormous grasp of foreign- and domestic-policy nuance, dedication to detail, ability to absorb staggering insult and personal pain while retaining dignity, resolve, even humor, and keep on keeping on. (Also, yes, dammit, let's hear it for her connections and funding and party-building background, too. Obama was awfully glad about those when she raised dough and campaigned for him to get to the Senate in the first place.)
I'd rather look foward to what a good president he might make in eight years, when his vision and spirit are seasoned by practical know-how -- and he'll be all of 54. Meanwhile, goodbye to turning him into a shining knight when actually he's an astute, smooth pol with speechwriters who've worked with the Kennedys' own speechwriter-courtier Ted Sorenson. If it's only about ringing rhetoric, let speechwriters run. But isn't it about getting the policies we want enacted?

That's a lengthy excerpt but not even the entire piece. Take a moment to grasp how much the Womens Media Center is needed. It's not going to be cross-posted at Common Dreams -- just, as Jess pointed out, they refused to cross-post Gloria Steinem's "Women Are Never Front-Runners" but were happy to post a 'rebuttal.'

Jess: What is known is that Common Dreams posted an idiot's response to Gloria Steinem but failed to have posted, before or since, Gloria Steinem's column "Women Are Never Front-Runners." And for anyone trying to give Common Dreams a pass on that by saying, "It was a New York Times column," Common Dreams regularly reposts NYT columns and editorials in full with their "fair use" tag at the end. They made a decision on Tuesday, when the column ran, not to post it. On Thursday, they made a decision to post a Bambi's groupies' trashing of Gloria Steinem.

What the election cycle has demonstrated on the Democratic side is how much women are still devalued and hated. Don't kid that it's not so. Like Laura Flanders has no problem bringing the Pig (twice busted for attempting to set up sex with an underage female online) onto her radio program, Common Dreams has no problem posting him. They've got him up today. But they didn't post Steinem and they didn't post Morgan. With Pig, we're supposed to overlook the busts. It's more important that his 'voice' be heard than that he's a predator and, thing is, women know that argument because we've heard it over and over, decade after decade. Gender is the greatest barrier. All women are told to wait -- over and over. Ask Flanders why she was so offended about Gary Glitter but thought nothing of repeatedly booking Pig on her program? Ask her to explain that. Ask Amy Goodman to. Ask Katrina vanden Heuvel why she, the mother of a teenage daughter, thinks his rambles are worth carrying at The Nation? Big media had the sense to wash their hands of him when the arrests came out. Not little media. Because you've got a lot of queen bees who won't use their voices, they don't want to look 'bitchy' or 'assertive' or 'demanding.' How's that working out for you?

So let's not pretend that the alleged "Progressive Community" is at all interested in women. They're not. If women say what they want to hear, they can't wait to post. Rosa Brooks, for instance, says exactly what Common Dreams wants and they post her like crazy. But let a woman write from a position of self-respect and not rush to play the boys' game and suddenly there is just silence. Go to their "about" section and you'll see praise and shout outs . . . from man after man . . . plus self-loathing Flanders. Or go to the stench of all slime, BuzzFlash, where bashing women is the norm and you'll find one attack on Hillary after another and the only authors are women who praise Bambi -- many described as 'feminist' which is a shock to those of us who are feminists.

On the Democratic side this election has demonstrated that Little Media isn't objective, isn't interested in a full exchange, isn't interested in truth. Women were tossed under the bus, the bi and multi-racial community was tossed under the bus, the LGBT community was tossed under the bus, the Palestinian people were tossed under the bus . . . And a whole lot more. Little Media signed up to do p.r. for Bambi and wanted to pass it off as journalism. In the process, they twisted every fact possible to villify Hillary for . . . being so similar in positions to Obama. Then they want to show up and argue about the 'movement' -- the one their spin created -- and claim it's proof of something. It's proof of nothing.

We're including a photo. It's at Larry Johnson's No Quarter. Yesterday, Amy Goodman was schilling for Bambi again in the headlines and it was rah-rah-rah, people turn out! Here's a photo of the Los Angeles speech -- not the tight shot Goodman offered on the TV version of her program





Oops! The Obama and Orpah Show didn't exactly pack them in, did it? UCLA. Isn't that a 'youth' paradise? But it was billed as rah-rah, pack 'em in. Those lies should remind you of another photo-op -- the pulling down of Saddam's statue in Baghdad which -- in a tight shot -- had tons of cheering Iraqis but -- in a wide shot -- demonstrated there was no crowd. Goodman pointed the first one out, you may remember, and called it out. The second? Oh, cookie, journalistic standards get tossed aside for the Bambi standard.

amy goodman doesn't care about east timor

that's Isaiah's The World Today Just Nuts "State of Misunion" and you should also read ava and c.i.'s 'TV: Nah-nah-nah, Hey-hey-hey, Goodbye' to understand my feelings on impeachment (i talked about it in '1 Book, 5 Minutes').

i'm for impeachment. but if people want impeachment and have the time to work on it they need to do so quickly. time is running out.

i know john conyers said on kpfk that bully boy could still be impeached after he leaves office.

nonsense!

if dems won't do it while he's in office, they're not going to do it after he's out. they have no guts. impeachment's only coming if it's forced down congress' throats and that's going to require occupying offices. the towns and cities passing resolutions will not bring about impeachment because there is not enough time. that is effort wasted that those working on impeachment should be focusing on congress.

a state, i believe vermont, toys with impeaching bully boy. good for them if they will but other states aren't going to because it's taken forever for the citizens of the 1 state (again, think it's vermont) to move mountains.

he needs to be impeached but you're up against nancy pelosi. the house brings charges of impeachment. the senate tries them.

i do think the illegal war would end quicker if bully boy was impeached.

i do think, even without the end of the iraq war, bully boy needs to be impeached.

but congress is the 1 who has the power (again, maybe vermont) and getting cities and towns to pass resolutions at this late date will not accomplish anything. congress is ignoring the cities and towns (as c.i. pointed out they did with the resolutions against the patriot act) so the battle has to be taken to congress and real quick or the window of opportunity closes.

turning to other things, read marcia's 'Amy Goodman peddles it for Barack' and elaine's ' Isaiah, Joshua Frank, Taylor Marsh.' bambi-love. there ought to be a cure.

or as barbra and barry once sang, 'it ought to be illegal.'

i'm voting for cynthia mckinney tomorrow (so is kat), elaine's voting for mike gravel, marcia's voting for hillary - forget it. i'm swiping from c.i. who has the links:


Betty: Hillary Clinton
Cedric: Hillary Clinton
Wally: Hillary Clinton
Mike: Hillary Clinton (for the primary, he planned to vote Cynthia McKinney but didn't realize he had a closed primary)
Ruth: Hillary Clinton
Marcia: Hillary Clinton
Jess: Green Party (hasn't decided between Ralph Nader or Cynthia McKinney)
Kat: Cynthia McKinney
Rebecca: Cynthia McKinney
Elaine: Mike Gravel

there. now you have the links. and the thing is, it's not a problem with any 1. i'm not saying, 'betty!' i'm glad she's proud of her vote. i'm proud of mine. but notice how diverse the community is. true, no 1 will support bambi. bambi's a liar and a war hawk and 'independent' media has propped him up. elaine and c.i. met that piece of scum at a big money fundraiser for his senate run and he declared (no surprise to any 1 who knows his record) that he wasn't for troops out of iraq. (they left immediately and did not give him a penny.)

but look at the names above. and realize that some people haven't declared. and grasp that we're diverse. we're actually diverse. there is more diversity in the sites of this community then in allegedly 'independent' media in the united states which all sings from the same hymnal, 'greater my bambi to me.'

wake up to the fact that you are being lied to and hustled. there is no way that all of 'independent' media just happened to agree. the bums can't agree on anything else but they all just happen to be for bambi?

get real.

and the pathetic and ugly katha pollitt came out for bambi in her latest piece of drivel.

i wish she'd write instead about how pathetic and unwanted she felt when her longtime live-in boyfriend dumped her for a better woman.

or maybe about what made her decide to get that ugly hair cut that only makes her look fatter and her nose look like a chicken beak.

or maybe she could write about anything except iraq ... wait, she does that already.

katha pollitt is an ugly 'girl.' she's mistakenly led a lot of women down the wrong path, young women, with the idea that she's a feminist.

so they write their little nothing pieces just like mommy katha.

katha pathetic should be her name.

you really need to look at all the bambi endorsements and start asking yourself just how independent 'independent' media is because the answer is not at all.

i don't care for hillary. i've never made a secret of that and i've called her out many times. but i didn't need to rip off old copies of the weekly standard from the 90s to do that. but that's what 'independent' media has done.

hillary has many good points.

so ask yourself how it is that a senator with no record, with ties to a man under federal indictment, could end up being favored by all?

and ask yourself why mother jones thinks they can post that crap about the clintons having people killed today.

'oh, we were tongue in cheek!' they'd claim. no, they weren't. they were trying to revive the vicious lies told about the clintons by the likes of jerry falwell.

mother jones should be embarrassed but they all should be.

barack has no record. he is pro-nuclear industry and, in fact, his campaign manager david axelrod represented the nuclear energy industry until bambi decided to run. he is not for universal health care and hillary has a better plan than he does.

he is not a friend of reproductive rights.

he tries to lie (and has bad liars try to lie for him) that he voted 'present' in the illinois legislature because it's what was wanted. no, 'present' was the 'safe' strategy invented by lobbyists (and not supported by the now chapter though a liar claims it was) for people who would vote 'no' if they had to go on record due to fallout in their districts.

bambi's district wasn't at risk.

so that tells you everything you need to know. he wouldn't stand up for women. he's made no statement that he would repeal the global gag rule on abortion. hillary would.

but dumb ass katha pollitt, picking at her ugly ass, decides bambi's the boy for her.

well she hasn't picked so well in the past, has she?

you are being lied to. you are being disinformed.

and you need to grasp that so you can start asking yourself why that is?

in this community, there's no hostility towards any 1 for their vote. (or intended vote.)

c.i. set the tone there and it's true of members with sites and without. and it's really sad that c.i. can do it but independent media can't.

and won't.

they're alleged journalists.

they're supposedly fair.

they're supposedly fact based.

and how did they all come to the conclusion that there was only 1 candidate worth supporting?

you need to grasp that you are being lied to and hustled.

it's like independent media is a party organ in the soviet union.

you need to grasp that because they will lie to you again.

if you don't catch on to reality, they will keep lying to you.

that's the thing about journalists. once an uncle of c.i.'s had to fire some 1. this was in college. the guy was a good reporter but he'd lied in a story. the uncle felt awful about firing him. but if he didn't get fired, he'd cut corners again and again. if he got away with it, he'd do it again.

and that's true of independent media.

they are lying non-stop. and do you really think they are going to go back to be honest after this is all over?

they aren't.

whenever it gets tough, they'll return to their lies.

think of all the articles you've read about how 'hillary voted for war with iran but edwards and obama were against it.' that's paul roget loab - a professional liar - and mike and i were talking about him earlier today. edwards was against it? okay, edwards wasn't in the senate (it was last summer) so his words are enough. i will believe him that he was opposed to it. but barack was in the senate.

and how did he vote?

they never tell you that because he did not vote.

they leave out of their 'reporting.' barack didn't want to go on record. he tried, at 1st, to lie and say he had no heads up to the vote. he did. he was given a heads up. he choose not to vote. the same as when women needed him for reproductive rights or for the protection of women who were the victims of sexual violence, he voted 'present.'

they are the natural born liars.

and they're getting away with their lies.

you need to grasp that and grasp that because they are getting away with it, they will try it again.

in 2004 and 2005, c.i. was very clear over and over that this community would never take part in anything like 'ralph, don't run.' c.i. has stressed over and over every year that some 1's vote is their own. c.i. has stressed over and over 'i don't care how you vote. it's your business.'

but that's something independent media can't do.

you need to ask yourself why that is?

you need to ask yourself why the die was cast against edwards when obama declared. you need to ask yourself why they slanted the coverage.

you need to ask yourself why amy goodman runs endorsements and testimonials to bambi but overlooks unions that endorse hillary?

you need to ask yourself why a tired old whore like amy goodman is seen as a voice of honesty because she's not. and any 1 who thinks 'rebecca, that's not very feminist to call goodman a whore' needs to grasp that a feminist does not publish her work in hustler which is what goodman did and would still be doing if she hadn't been called out on. goodman's not a feminist. she's just another hustler begging for money.

loony zooney, stephen zunes, just threw palestians under the bus. here's the link (i can't bring myself to put in the title) http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/02/04/6836/ and zunes should be in a world of trouble for his columns with his university because he is an academic and he's always supposed to apply academic standards even when writing for the popular press. he writes about bambi's advisors but somehow misses war hawk sarah sewell who told charlie rose that there had to be a war, there must be a pony, we can't call iraq a bad war or a mistake. we must keep on keeping on. he does include dennis ross, however. dennis ross hates the palestinian people. here's what he write about dennis ross:

Some of his advisors, however, have particularly poor records on human rights and international law, such as retired General Merrill McPeak, a backer of Indonesia's occupation of East Timor, and Dennis Ross, a supporter of Israel’s occupation of the West Bank.

before i get to dennis ross, note that amy goodman has whored herself out for bambi, the same amy goodman who wants to go to the well over and over with 'i was in east timor! i saw the killing! we must save east timor!' but bambi's advisor merrill mcpeak is 'a backer of indonesia's occupation of east timor.' whore goodman just tossed east timor under the bus. dennis ross doesn't recognize the rights of the palestinian people. in addition, he's an on-air for fox 'news,' publishes in the new republic(an). he is a zionist. he is a fellow with the washington institute for near east policy which is a think tank started by aipac's then research director martin indyk and has on its board richad pearl (yes, that richard pearl), alexander haig, iran-contra fame's robert mcfarlane ... i could go on and on. but the point is bambi is backed by aipac, by those who want more slaughter in east timor. and zuney and goody cover up for him. it's disgusting. they are disgusting. they had no reason to but into the elections to begin with. their job was to cover reality. but instead they wanted to build up a candidate and even if his backers support the deaths of the palestinians, the east timorese and others, they'll look the other way. they're fakes and frauds.

let's close with honesty, let's close with c.i.'s 'Iraq snapshot:'


Monday, February 4, 2008. Chaos and violence continue, the US admits Iraqi civilians were killed by US fire, Henry Waxman reveals that Cookie Krongard lied to Congress and Congress knew, things get worse daily for women in Iraq, political coverage at the request of members sick of 'alternative' and 'independent' media, and more.

Starting with war resistance. On Saturday Angela Hickman (Queen's Journal) spoke with author Lawrence Hill who had two books released last year -- the fictional Someone Knows My Name (Canadian title: The Book of Negroes) and The Deserter's Tale, with Joshua Key, which documents Key's service in Iraq and how he came to the decision that he could no longer participate in the illegal war. Hill explained, "[The main characters are] both ordinary people who are drawn into a canvas of world events that they didn't ask to be drawn into." Hickman explains, "Hill said he heard Key interviewed on CBC and thought his story was fascinating and the next day his publisher approached Hill about doing the story." Joshua Key, wife Brandi and their children went to Canada as have many war resisters. Dee Knight (Workers World) reports on the actions two weekends ago in support of war resisters being granted safe harbor in Canada:

The rallies urged the Canadian House of Commons to adopt a recommendation of its Committee on Citizenship and Immigration that would make it possible for U.S. Iraq War resisters to obtain permanent resident status in Canada.
[. . .]
Courage to Resist in collaboration with the War Resisters Support Campaign (Canada) initiated the actions at Canadian consulates across the U.S. They had the support of Iraq Veterans Against the War, Veterans for Peace and many other groups. This event was the first nationally coordinated action in the U.S. in support of war resisters in Canada. Since the illegal U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq, many soldiers have been going AWOL (Absent Without Leave). GIs who have publicly refused to deploy--or re-deploy--to Iraq have been court-martialed and imprisoned. Thousands of service people are AWOL and are believed to be in hiding in the U.S. and abroad. Hundreds have fled to Canada.

You can make your voice heard by the Canadian parliament which has the ability to pass legislation to grant war resisters the right to remain in Canada. Three e-mails addresses to focus on are: Prime Minister Stephen Harper (pm@pm.gc.ca -- that's pm at gc.ca) who is with the Conservative party and these two Liberals, Stephane Dion (Dion.S@parl.gc.ca -- that's Dion.S at parl.gc.ca) who is the leader of the Liberal Party and Maurizio Bevilacqua (Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca -- that's Bevilacqua.M at parl.gc.ca) who is the Liberal Party's Critic for Citizenship and Immigration. A few more can be found here at War Resisters Support Campaign. For those in the US, Courage to Resist has an online form that's very easy to use.

There is a growing movement of resistance within the US military which includes Josh Randall, Robby Keller, Chuck Wiley, James Stepp, Rodney Watson, Michael Espinal, Matthew Lowell, Derek Hess, Diedra Cobb, Brad McCall, Justin Cliburn, Timothy Richard, Robert Weiss, Phil McDowell, Steve Yoczik, Ross Spears, Peter Brown, Bethany "Skylar" James, Zamesha Dominique, Chrisopther Scott Magaoay, Jared Hood, James Burmeister, Eli Israel, Joshua Key, Ehren Watada, Terri Johnson, Clara Gomez, Luke Kamunen, Leif Kamunen, Leo Kamunen, Camilo Mejia, Kimberly Rivera, Dean Walcott, Linjamin Mull, Agustin Aguayo, Justin Colby, Marc Train, Abdullah Webster, Robert Zabala, Darrell Anderson, Kyle Snyder, Corey Glass, Jeremy Hinzman, Kevin Lee, Mark Wilkerson, Patrick Hart, Ricky Clousing, Ivan Brobeck, Aidan Delgado, Pablo Paredes, Carl Webb, Stephen Funk, Blake LeMoine, Clifton Hicks, David Sanders, Dan Felushko, Brandon Hughey, Clifford Cornell, Joshua Despain, Joshua Casteel, Katherine Jashinski, Dale Bartell, Chris Teske, Matt Lowell, Jimmy Massey, Chris Capps, Tim Richard, Hart Viges, Michael Blake, Christopher Mogwai, Christian Kjar, Kyle Huwer, Wilfredo Torres, Michael Sudbury, Ghanim Khalil, Vincent La Volpa, DeShawn Reed and Kevin Benderman. In total, at least fifty US war resisters in Canada have applied for asylum.
Information on war resistance within the military can be found at The Objector, The G.I. Rights Hotline [(877) 447-4487], Iraq Veterans Against the War and the War Resisters Support Campaign. Courage to Resist offers information on all public war resisters. Tom Joad maintains a list of known war resisters. In addition, VETWOW is an organization that assists those suffering from MST (Military Sexual Trauma).


Meanwhile IVAW is organizing a March 2008 DC event:

In 1971, over one hundred members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War gathered in Detroit to share their stories with America. Atrocities like the My Lai massacre had ignited popular opposition to the war, but political and military leaders insisted that such crimes were isolated exceptions. The members of VVAW knew differently.
Over three days in January, these soldiers testified on the systematic brutality they had seen visited upon the people of Vietnam. They called it the Winter Soldier investigation, after Thomas Paine's famous admonishing of the "summer soldier" who shirks his duty during difficult times. In a time of war and lies, the veterans who gathered in Detroit knew it was their duty to tell the truth.
Over thirty years later, we find ourselves faced with a new war. But the lies are the same. Once again, American troops are sinking into increasingly bloody occupations. Once again, war crimes in places like Haditha, Fallujah, and Abu Ghraib have turned the public against the war. Once again, politicians and generals are blaming "a few bad apples" instead of examining the military policies that have destroyed Iraq and Afghanistan.
Once again, our country needs Winter Soldiers.
In March of 2008, Iraq Veterans Against the War will gather in our nation's capital to break the silence and hold our leaders accountable for these wars. We hope you'll join us, because yours is a story that every American needs to hear.
Click here to sign a statement of support for Winter Soldier: Iraq & Afghanistan

March 13th through 16th are the dates for the Winter Soldier Iraq & Afghanistan Investigation. Dee Knight (Workers World) notes, "IVAW wants as many people as possible to attend the event. It is planning to provide live broadcasting of the sessions for those who cannot hear the testimony firsthand. 'We have been inspired by the tremendous support the movement has shown us,' IVAW says. 'We believe the success of Winter Soldier will ultimately depend on the support of our allies and the hard work of our members'." As part of their fundraising efforts for the event, they are holding houseparties and a recent one in Boston featured both IVAW's Liam Madden and the incomprable Howard Zinn as speakers.


In Iraq a law has been passed -- a benchmark, in fact -- but hold off on sounding the trumpets. Amit R. Paley and Joshua Partlow (Washington Post) report that the de-de-Baathification law will be practiced law next week since it is "considered as approved" following the refusal of anyone on the presidency council to officially object. CBS and AP observe it became law without the singature of the Sunni representative on the three-member presidency council because the constitution requires the body to act within 10 days after the panel received the law, according to Iraq's constitution." Alissa J. Rubin (New York Times) reported yesterday (before it was known what step the council would take) CIA asset and Iraqi exile into the US invaded Ahmed Chalabi has been blistering in his criticism stating that the result of passage would be "all former Baathists now serving in the security services would lose their jobs, a total of 7,000 people" and, of the Iraqi Parliament, "People should pay attention to what they are discussing and voting on."

Today Leila Fadel (McClatchy Newspapers) again explores conditions for women in Iraq (and the outlet should create a folder of her reports on this topic and cites the Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights as the source for 1.5 million figure -- the number of women who have become widows during the illegal war -- while Iraq al Amal Association's Hanaa Edward explains that "11 percent of the more than 20 million Iraqi families were supported by unmarried or widowed women in 2005. Widows who register with the state receive about $40 a month, barely enough to survive on their own, let alone take care of their children." Meanwhile Weam Namou (uruknet.info) looks at what has been lost for women during the Iraq War for 'liberation,' "Since the invasion, many women have been executed, assaulted, raped or released only after their families paid considerable ransom money. Serious threats and deadly attacks have forced Christians and Muslims to wear the veil and quit their jobs, and to avoid makeup and education. My friend's sister-in-law, at the start of the war, was stabbed in the heart simply because she was wearing a cross, which was ripped off her neck and thrown over her body. Today when you talk to Iraqi women they remember 'the good old days' when Saddam was in power and women were able to safely go to work, participate in social activities, take part in politics or stroll outside in the middle of the night. During Saddam's regime, women were free to choose whether to wear western-style dress and make-up or the black abaya. When I was in Baghdad, I wore the clothes I'd packed from America. No one in the streets blinked an eye."

Meanwhile Wikileaks publishes a US government document on Iraq. From their summary:

Classified SECRET consolidated US Forces Rules of Engagement (ROE) for Iraq.On first reading, the document contains a number of items of interest to the press, including rules about mosque attacks, detention of immams, cross border incursions (including Iran and Syria), the use of mines and riot control agents, terrorist targeting, the destruction of Iraqi government property used by insurgents and even kafkaesque rules for attacks on WMD mobile production labs. Deeper reading by those more familiar with the US-Iraq war is likely to reveal other items of interest, for instance variations in the declaration that Al Quds, the Mahdi Army and armed supporters of Muqtada Al-Sadr are enemies who may be engaged at will.The document forms a talking point to most US operations in Iraq and the degree of official sanction for them.

In it, you'll learn -- among other things -- that US forces could cross into Syria or Iran, that tasers are permitted in US controlled Iraqi prisons (with consent of the prison's US commander) and more. Meanwhile, Garrett Therolf and Saif Hameed (Los Angeles Times) report, "Nine people were killed and four were injured in an errant U.S. airstrike southeast of Baghdad, the military said Sunday.One child was among the dead, and two children were among the injured, said U.S. Army Maj. Brad Leighton." The numbers are in dispute with some putting the number of innocent civilians killed at 20. Martin Fletcher (Times of London) notes: "Even the US figures would make the civilian death toll the highest since last October, when a US air strike killed around a dozen Iraqis, including women and children, near Samarra, north of Baghdad. In November a leader of one of the 'Awakening Councils' of Concerned Local Citizens claimed US soldiers mistakenly killed dozens of his fighters during a protracted gun battle north of Baghdad. The US military admitted killing 25 men, but insisted they were insurgents."

Turning to some of today's reported violence . .


Bombings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports a Baghdad roadside bombing that wounded two people and another Baghdad roadside bombing wounded two police officers. Reuters notes a Kirkuk roadside bombing left two people injured. CBS and AP notes, "Turkish warplanes on Monday bombed some 70 Kurdish rebel targets in nothern Iraq, the military said. It was the fifth aerial attack against Kurdish rebel bases in nothern Iraq in two months."

Shootings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that Waleed Haitham Idrees ("employee of the ministry of foreign affairs") in Baghdad today while an attack in Diyala Province a bus driver was shot dead "along with a 7-year-old girl. Her 4-year-old brother was injured." Reuters notes 3 police officers were shot dead in Mosul, 7 suspected of something people shot dead in Salman Pak by US and Iraqi forces and "Gunmen killed a foreign ministry official in a drive-by shooting in western Baghdad's Mansour district, police said."

Kidnappings?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports that a a man was kidnapped in an armed home invasion in Baquba and found dead shortly after while clerics Ali Hassan al-Khafaji and Abdul Rahman al-Idreesi were kidnapped in Basra.

Corpses?

Hussein Kadhim (McClatchy Newspapers) reports 2 corpses were discovered in Baghdad today.

Meanwhile Reuters reports, "Iraq has halted oil supplies to Austria's OMV AG in protest over a deal between the company and the Kurdish regional government, Iraq's oil minister said on Friday." This as Reuters also reports the Turkish military sent planes over northern Iraq to bomb three villages today.


In the New York Times, Thom Shanker reports, " The Pentagon on Monday will unveil its proposed 2009 budget of $515.4 billion. If it is approved in full, annual military spending, when adjusted for inflation, will have reached its highest level since World War II." And where is the oversight?

"I am not personally following every allegation of corruption in Iraq, Mr. Chairman. But I am certain that we are tracking these allegations of corruption, because no one is more concerned about allegations of corruption, because no one is more concerned about what is, in fact, a pervasive problem of corruption than we are," declared US Secretary of State and Anger Condi Rice to the US House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform last October. The chair of that committee told Bill Moyers (on last Friday's Bill Moyers Journal -- text, audio and video), "I was so stunned when finally she admitted that somebody at the State Department should have been looking after these things. And I said to her, 'But you're the Secretary. You're in charge of the State Department. You're the one who should be making sure that the job is being done.' But I think it was a rare moment of candor."

The set of hearings on Blackwater got some attention from the media and some white washing. Scott Shane (New York Times) decided to play balladeer (November 17, 2007) with a feel-good write up on one aspect: brothers Howard Cookie Krongard and Alvin Buzzy Krongard. Cookie was the State Department's Inspector General, Buzzy was on the advisory board for the mercenary company Blackwater. During the November hearing, Cookie tried to deny Buzzy was on the board. After the committee broke for lunch, Cookie swore he'd just learned -- on the break -- that Buzzy was on Blackwater's board and announced he would be recusing himself from Blackwater matters (after having covered for Blackwater throughout his tenure as Inspector General). Cookie would finally step down, as Warren P. Strobel (McClatchy Newspapers) noted, "forced out for allegedly impeding ongoing criminal investigations into the construction of a new, $740 million U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and security firm Blackwater Worldwide." With Moyers, Waxman revealed what really happened.

Henry Waxman: He thought he could just get away with saying, "No, it's not true." His brother's not on the board of Blackwater. And that would be it. But the members of our committee were ready. And one member asked him -- here's -- "See, this e-mail from Eric Prince, who's the head of Blackwater to your brothers, thanking him for joining the board."

Moyers then plays the clip with Cookie denying further and Waxman calling a break only to have Cookie return afterward and claim he had 'new information.'

Bill Moyers: What went through your mind as you watched that performance unfold before your eyes?

Henry Waxman: The man was absolutely lying. His brother claimed that he inform him well in advance that he was on board of Blackwater. When he was asked after our hearing, the brother made that statement publicly. And we even threatened to bring both brothers in, put them under oath and see who was telling the truth and who was not.

Bill Moyers: Why didn't you do that?

Henry Waxman: Well we were set to do it, but we heard from Mr. Krongard at the -- inspector general of the state department -- offering to quit rather than have that hearing. And in my view, it was better to have him leave that job than go through a hearing that wou'dve been embarrassing. But at least we got the result that seems in the best interest of the American people.

Bill Moyers: What does the failure of the inspector general's office at the state department and that episode say about oversight in Iraq today?

Henry Waxman: Here's the watchdog, the Inspector General for the State Department was impeding the work of doing the investigations to keep the State Department honest. Nobody was keeping them honest.

There is a great deal in the two-parter on government corruption, but note that the chair of the committee has stated clearly that Cookie was lying and that only after the threat to take testimony from both brothers on the issue was made and being moved towards did Cookie resign. That tidbit didn't make it into the official record previously. That's Bill Moyers Journal and also of interest may be the show's opening segment with a discussion of endorsement.

DON'T LINK TO HER! Jess, Martha and Shirley gave me a summary of today's e-mails.
In political propaganda news, Amy Goodman disgraced herself today -- a regular pattern these days. No link to the Cynthia McKinney interview, as requested, read Marcia later today for why. Goody can take comfort in the fact that Stephen Zunes seems determined to be Loony Zoony as judged by his 'performance' on the KPFA Evening News but even he was drawfed by Norman Solomon whose appearance will bite him in the ass at a future point. So eager to pimp for Bambi, Solomon began praising the weak-ass MoveOn which he's criticized before and, yes, will again. So file away his claim about the laughable 'analysis' about MoveOn's 'poll' that led to their endorsement:

And I think that explains why for instance, the voting by MoveOn members nation wide -- which is a pretty good barometer and expression and, in a sense, galvanization of a left liberal constituency in this country. Why did MoveOn voters went 70% for Barack Obama rather than Hillary Clinton?

Norman, Norman. At least with ____ we all know he still wants back in the 'club' -- back in the halls of power. It's never going to happen. Never. He's disgraced himself and the only thing that had most of us return to speaking to him after the whole Vickie affair (yeah, I said it) was that an illegal war broke out and we thought he was getting back to his roots. His endorsement of Bambi was an insult to all who fought for Civil Rights, against the death and dying in Vietnam, for women's rights, for gays rights, for Chicano rights, for labor rights, go down the list. But it was a sign of how eager to suck up he still is, how he continues to delude himself that he'll be invited back into the power 'club' (never, ever happening) that he'd sell himself out. So that's _____. But Norman?

Ay-yi-yi. MoveOn claims over 3 million "members" and less than 200,000 people voted. Read Bill Samuel's analysis at OpEd News and grasp that Solomon has written similar analysis in the past . . . of MoveOn. When MoveOn drops the illegal war further off the radar remember that Norman Solomon -- so desperate to pimp for Bambi -- declared them the "barometer" of the left-liberal consensus in the US. Remember it. Those lunatic words will haunt him. Norman, Norman. He's not a politician, why he wants to hop on board a campaign is anyone's guess but it does need to be called out because, as Third Party notes, this is exactly the nonsense that led to left names attacking Nader in 2004 and silencing their criticism of the illegal war. To be really clear for those who may be too young to remember, turning the peace movement into the John Kerry for President campaign prolonged the illegal war and made it that much harder to pick up the pieces. Why "media analyst" Norman Solomon feels the need to cheerlead a candidate -- any candidate -- is a puzzler. But Third Party is correct, this is how it started, how 'brave' voices on the left dropped the illegal war for a full damn year.

"What is the alternative to 'alternative' media?" wonders Lynda noting, "I really need an alternative from Bambi love." Don't we all. For those who specifically complained about Sunday's KPFA Evening News (28 members), Democracy Now! (1323 members) or about the alleged independent media in general, we'll note the campaigns by providing what 'independent' media couldn't address today: reality. They've never been able to address it -- Big or Small Media. As high school senior Lee Thach (New America Media) explains how the media 'steered' his choice: "'Race was one of the issues we expected to discuss here tonight,' said moderator Brian Williams, referring to Barack Obama's blackness. At that moment I switched party affiliations and joined the Green Party because I would rather be insane and care about issues than sane and pretend Barack Obama was running as Al Sharpton. . . . Months into the election, I would have expected to know Obama's healthcard plan or Clinton's plan to get us out of Iraq. But based on watching 24-hour news, I really only know their gender, their race." In today's New York Times, Paul Krugman explains, "The principal policy division between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama involves health care . . . there really is a big difference between the candidates' approaches. And new research, just released, confirms what I've been saying: the difference between the plans could well be the difference between achieving universal health coverage -- a key progressive goal -- and falling far short. Specifically, new estimates say that a plan resembling Mrs. Clinton's would cover almost twice as many of those now uninsured as a plan resembling Mr. Obama's -- at only slightly higher costs." Krugman goes on to explain why and concludes, "If you combine the economic analysis with these political realities, here's what I think it says: If Mrs. Clinton gets the Democratic nomination, there is some chance -- nobody knows how big -- that we'll get universal health care in the next administration. If Mr. Obama gets the nomination, it just won't happen." KPFA will broadcast live coverage Tuesday night starting at 5:00 pm PST, 7:00 pm Central and 9:00 pm EST. The broadcast will be hosted by Aimee Allison and Larry Bensky "with Davey D." (Note, I am not making fun of Davey D, that is how KPFA is billing the event.) KPFA streams online (for free) and can be heard over broadcast airwaves at 94.1 FM in the Bay Area. With David Solnit, Aimee Allison is the author of Army Of None cover in their book. Here's Ralph Nader on Barack Obama:

He's too abstract and too general. He comes on as a constitutional law specialist, but he offers nothing to hold this outlaw presidency of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney accountable. There are so many impeachable offenses that have been documented by epeople such as the head of the American Bar Association a copule years ago, Michael Greco and many other legal scholars and pracitioners. And he's not speaking out. He's backing away from any kind of accountability for a presidency that has made a mockery of the constitution, made a mockery of federal law and international treaties, whether it's systemic torture and illegal war in Iraq, spying on Americans without judicial approval or undermining the authority of Congress, which he's a part of.
The other thing, he says he wants to reduce health-care expenses, but again he avoids issues where the corporations are ripping into the health-care dollar, over $200 billion of computerized billing fraud and abuse, according to the GAO. You have over $300 billion that can be saved by a full Medicare system in administrative expenses.
You have too many operations. You have over-medication. These are the things that corporations are profitting from, and he's not focusing enough. In addition to medical malpractice and infectious hospital-induced infections. So he's got to have more fortitude. He is censoring himself. And that's the tragedy.

Nader was appearing on Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer and also cited John Edwards critique of the two-front runners while discussing his own moves to run for president. Blitzer cited The Nation's slam piece from last week on Nader -- by John Nichols who did dirty work on the Kucinich campaign via a cover story for The Progressive last year -- and asked about the suggestion that 2004 results indicated a decrease of support for Nader from 2000 and Nader replied: "The Democrats filed 23 lawsuits in 12 weeks to get us off the ballot in state after state like Pennsylvania and Ohio. They did it, in their own words, to distract us and to drain our resources. They're not going to get away with that this time. We're ready for them. We're developing a pro bono network of lawyers. We've already sued the Democratic National Committee for what they did in abuse of legal process in 2004. We are now being flooded with volunteers. Donations are coming in in the testing of the water, period. And I always believed, Wolf, that the forces of injustice work 24 hours a day. The forces for justice and redirection in this country that's desired by so many Americans who are dissatisfied with the two parties, the forces for justice must also work 24 hours a day." Nader also explained why Michael Bloomberg throwing his hat into the ring as a third-party candidate wouldn't mean he (Nader) would pull out.

Finally, from John V. Walsh's "The Invisible Green Primary" (CounterPunch):Massachusetts has three primaries on Super Tuesday--a Republican, a Democrat and a Green. (In MA, the Greens have made common cause with the Rainbow Coalition to form the Green Rainbow Party, GRP). But you would never know it from the declarations of Democrat Secretary of State William Galvin who in his public service announcements speaks only of the Republican and Democrat contests. This is especially damaging to the GRP, because in MA those who are not registered with any party, the so-called "unenrolled" voters are eligible to vote in the GRP primary. These are the most disillusioned and most likely to go Green. But such voters must ask for the Green ballot at the polling place. The people staffing the polling places are supposed to inform the unenrolled voters of all three options, but right now it is unclear if Galvin has so instructed them in a way that will guarantee it happens. Given Galvin's public service announcements, that seems doubtful.This is an outrage since the GRP had to work very hard to win ballot access after the "safe states" debacle of 2004 in which the GP suffered mightily at the hands of the DemoGreens who gained control and sought above all to protect the prowar John Kerry. So in 2006 the hard working Greens set about gathering signatures once again for a series of statewide offices, Governor, Secretary of State and Treasurer. The GRP candidates for Secretary of State, Jill Stein, and for Treasurer, Jamie O'Keefe, both won close to 20% of the vote, giving the GRP back its ballot status. And so the GRP is entitled to have a presidential primary this coming Tuesday. The ballots are printed and available at the polling places.Not only that but both Ralph Nader and Cynthia McKinney, along with a number of lesser known candidates, will be on the GRP ballot. Ralph and Cynthia are certain to attract votes if the people know about the primaruy. But so far not a whimper out of Galvin, who is considered a "liberal" Democrat, or the mass media despite a steady stream of letters to the editor and op-ed submissions. So tell your friends in MA that there are three primaries afoot on Tuesday--and in two of them there are genuine antiwar candidates, Ron Paul in the Republican primary and all the candidates in the GRP primary. There should be enough variety there for everyone to cast a genuine antiwar vote, no matter your other beliefs.